United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
686 F.3d 832
D.C. Cir.2012Background
- US government sued cigarette manufacturers under RICO for deceptive health claims; district court held RICO §1964(a) provides forward-looking injunctions and rejected disgorgement; court issued broad injunctions including corrective statements and disclosures; Tobacco Control Act enacted quickly after ruling, restricting advertising, labeling, and health descriptors and empowering FDA enforcement; defendants moved to vacate injunctions on jurisdictional grounds and for primary jurisdiction deference; this court largely affirmed injunctions in 2009, and later addressed whether post‑Act changes mooted or justified vacatur
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tobacco Control Act divested jurisdiction to maintain injunctions | U.S. argues jurisdiction persists if future violations remain likely | Philip Morris contends Act moots or undermines likelihood of future violations | No; jurisdiction retained; likelihood remained |
| Whether district court properly refused vacatur under primary jurisdiction | Court should refer to FDA due to regulatory scheme | Primary jurisdiction appropriate for agency expertise | Not abused; court did not defer to FDA |
| Whether intervening legislation mootness doctrine applied | Act would moot relief | Act not enough to moot or repeal injunctions | Act did not moot the injunctions; proper to retain relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, 658 F.3d 1162 (9th Cir. 2011) (intervening legislation may moot otherwise moot cases; distinguishable facts)
- Cody v. Cox, 509 F.3d 606 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (mootness when legislation makes relief impossible)
- Diffenderfer v. Gomez-Colon, 587 F.3d 445 (1st Cir. 2009) (intervening law can moot but not here)
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2000) (formidable burden of mootness for voluntary compliance)
- United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 396 F.3d 1190 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (district court may issue forward-looking remedies under §1964(a))
- United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 566 F.3d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (Affirmance of most injunction aspects and jurisdiction to issue them)
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2000) (mootness standard for voluntary compliance)